Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.270

Section 143(3) falls under section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 270 (Assessment) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 270 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 143(3) is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 of the 75,154 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 143(3)

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT
243 ITR 83 · 2000 · Supreme Court
2,943
citing judgments

For revision under Section 263, the Assessing Officer's order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue; if either condition is not met, the revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked. An order is not erroneous merely because the Assessing Officer did not record the details of enquiries conducted, provided due enquiries were made.

CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

An assessment under section 153A is without jurisdiction if there is an absence of incriminating material for an unabated assessment year.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

Judgments on Section 143(3)

ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar vs. Bimala Projects Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 122/CTK/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Jul 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.S.Saini, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.122/Ctk/2016 (धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Vs. Bimala Projects Pvt. Ltd., 113, 1(3), Bhubaneswar Station Square, Kharavela Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751005 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacb 9513 E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. & Cross Objection No.08/Ctk/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2012-2013) Bimala Projects Pvt. Ltd., 113, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Station Square, Kharavela Ward-1(3), Bhubaneswar Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751005 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaacb 9513 E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Pradhan,Citdr निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Ar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/08/2017 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed An Appeal & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 18.01.2016, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.0086/2015-16, U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2012-2013. First We Take Up The Revenue’S Appeal & The Facts Narrated Therein, Wherein The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :- 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Law As Well As On Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.43,53,123/- Made By The Ao On Accountof Discount & Commission.

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan,CITDR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Rokia Khatun, Nadia vs. ITO, Jangipur Murshidabad, Murshidabad

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is treated as allowed

ITA 941/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M. Jagtap] I.T.A. No. 941/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2008 -09 Rokia Khatun.............................………………………………………………………….……Appellant C/O P.S. Gupta (Advocate),100 Bank Lane, Hatar Para, P.O. Krishnagar, Dist. Nadia Nadia – 741101 [Pan : Amapk0898A Ito, Jangipur Murshidaad……………………………………………….....................Respondent Murshidabad Appearances By: Shri K.M. Roy, Fca & Shri P.S. Gupta, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. None Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 12, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 14, 2017 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(Appeals) – 36, Kolkata Dated 27.02.2014 & The Solitary Issue Involved Therein Relates To The Addition Of Rs. 9,01,389/- Made By The Ao & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) On Account Of Difference In Cash Balance. 2. The Assessee In The Present Case Is An Individual Who Is Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Bidi Leaves & Tobacco. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Was Filed By Him On 29.09.2008 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs. 1,51,638/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceeding, It Was Noticed By The Ao That The Cash Balance As On 01.04.2007 As Per The Cash Book Of The Assessee Was Rs. 13,83,520/- While The Cash Balance Shown In The Balance

Section 143(3)